Marty Rathbun’s Contagious Dishonor

There are gradients to just about everything, and, as we all know, absolutes are unobtainable.

A man may be described as strong, but that is relative.  He may be stronger than most of the other men in his circle, but his strength is somewhere on the strong scale.  There will undoubtedly be other men that are stronger than him.  And even the very strongest of these will at some point be discovered to be less strong than some new guy who comes along and is stronger still.

There are many gradient scales.  Looks and physique are others – although these can be highly subjective with some people thinking a certain look or body type or color is more desirable than another.  Intelligence is another that is easily measured, except towards the top where some people so far outshine their contemporaries that their brilliance is almost inconceivable to the vast majority (Isaac Newton discovering the laws of gravitation and motion 300 years ago is a famous example – he was so ahead of his time that even today only a tiny fraction of college educated people throughout the world could tell you what he discovered, let alone name the laws).

The usual way of looking at things in relation to scales seems to be toward more and more of its essence, rather than less and less.

In other words, if we are talking about the beauty scale then we tend to talk in relation to that scale and add its essence.  Wow, that is a pretty baby!” or, “That is an even prettier baby than Mary’s.”  “That is the cutest, prettiest baby in the whole wide world!”

We don’t usually talk down the scale, taking away the essence.  We wouldn’t for example say, “Your baby is really a whole lot less pretty than Sarah’s baby.”

You’d say, “Oh my!  Now that is an ugly baby!”

So there is the ugly scale – which is a scale all of its own and which doesn’t really seem to be connected with the pretty scale – even though it is.  It’s the opposite end of the pretty scale, but is treated like it is its own scale with a starting point and then the addition of its essence to describe it as it heads towards infinity or an absolute.

The ugly scale is measured by more and more of the essence of ugly.  I don’t really want to go up the ugly scale talking about babies, because that would be in bad taste.  No mother anywhere on earth ever wanted an ugly baby nor wished one on another.  Plus, ugly is not really something people can do much about – unlike some of the other scales that apply to people.

So let me instead flip to a different quality and we can check that out.  Like honor.

A man who keeps his word, who makes good on his promises, is honest, upright.  Someone, who goes beyond that, maybe by significant personal sacrifice, to honor his word may be called noble or principled or some other such word that would signify a greater degree of honor.  At the top end of the honor scale one finds people who refuse to compromise their integrity, even at tremendous personal risk.    There you find Saints and real, actual Martyrs.

Flip the scale around and we have the other side of honest and upright, and that is dishonest and crooked.

Like the ugly scale, this too is a scale that increases, and which has no complete absolute.

Adding the essence of turpitude to this scale we run across some very interesting gradients, and some great words that describe them – not that these are in order. Base, contemptible, shameful, discreditable, degraded, sordid, ignoble, unscrupulous, despicable, treacherous, reprehensible, ignominious, unprincipled, corrupt, traitorous.

Why am I going into all this?  You may think it is because I was looking for words to describe The Rat, but you would be wrong.

I was in fact trying to find concepts or words that describe one of his lieutenants – a particularly nasty piece of work by the name of Haydn James.

Haydn James is right up there at the top of the dishonest/crooked scale.  It’s just that there aren’t really any words to adequately describe him.  Well, none that I know of that I can print.

Unlike the ugly scale, this is a scale that one can do something about.  Haydn chose to ascend this scale to its pinnacle, except that I am sure he will find some way to even exceed that.  So, words absent, let me simply say that if the dishonest/crooked scale was Cleopatra’s Needle, Haydn James would be the little pyramid at the very top.  Call it what you like.

Soon I will release data I have had for over a year now that shows Haydn James to be a common thief, a bully (of women mostly and always people smaller than him), a violent thug, a batterer, a wannbe orangutan, a liar, and an avowed degenerate.

Haydn James is a ‘barrel of laughs’.  That is what they would say in England where he comes from.  In England they have a class system and he is lower-working class.  In the rest of the world he classless, which is to say, devoid of any kind of class at all.

He posts on the web under the name of Thomas Paine.  That’s like a deranged pirate posting under the name of Admiral Nelson.   It’s worth a laugh just for the presumptuousness of it, but that is all.  Who wants to hear about Common Sense from a Common Criminal?

Haydn James is a Turkey posing as a Golden Eagle, and selling flying lessons.  You have to be suicidal to enroll.

A little story about Haydn James.

Haydn James was in the Sea Org and became disaffected.  He admits this.

As a result of his disaffection, he decided to leave, along with wife and daughter.  To facilitate his leaving, Haydn disguised and withheld his disaffection, not making the full extent of it known, nor dealing with nor allowing anyone else to deal with, the true causes for his disaffection.  He says as much.

(Had he made known his resentment, his conduct as an executive would have been uncovered and, relieved at having come clean, he would have been afforded the opportunity to make amends for all the harm he caused.  But – as is the way with most criminals – he chose to blame ‘society’ for having become debased, and refused to take any responsibility).

Once out of the Sea Org Haydn sought work.  There are millions of companies in the USA and he could have approached any of them.  Instead he sought work from a Scientologist.

The man was a dentist.  He used LRH Admin Tech in his business because he found that it helped his business.

Haydn sold himself and got his job, and that of his wife and his daughter, on the basis that he too was a Scientologist.  Not just any Scientologist, but one who was highly trained in the use of LRH Admin Tech.

Such training would include the Data Series and the ability to do evaluations; the Management Series and the ability to manage; the Ethics Tech and the ability to assign conditions to areas, determine the actual production of an area, and also to deal with any staff that were not diligent in their work.

Haydn did not make it known that he was disaffected with Scientology – in fact he gave exactly the opposite appearance.  He was therefore hired on a lie.
At the time he was hired, Haydn knew that LRH policy for Scientologists is to cut their communication lines with people who commit suppressive acts; who violate certain codes.

At the time he was hired, Haydn knew that if he told that dentist the truth about what he thought of the Church of Scientology, that dentist would not have hired him.

While working for the dentist and pretending to be a Scientologist, Haydn James actively committed suppressive acts.  He knew what he was doing and knew that if found out he would be declared a suppressive person.  He also knew that the dentist would definitely fire him, if only because of his sheer duplicity.  At all times Haydn knew the Senior Policy that governed his relationship with other Scientologists and with the dentist.

For some months Haydn went undetected, but once his suppressive acts were found out he was fired.

That is what you call a foregone conclusion.  He knew that was what would happen.

Haydn has now sued the dentist claiming he was unfairly or unjustly dismissed, and that he was dismissed on religious discrimination grounds.

I am no lawyer.  But this all seems wrong to me.  I thought the law was about what is right and what is wrong.

Personally I think he set the guy up.  He chose somewhere that had a good insurance policy and applied for a job, knowing he would cause himself to be fired. I may be wrong – but I doubt it.  I do know Haydn.

If a man came out of the Navy and applied to the Captain of a ship, citing his knowledge and ability with the basics of seamanship and asserted his allegiance to the American Flag, would that Captain really be considered unjust if he removed him from duty upon discovering that he was in cahoots with Somali pirates?

I am told that it is all down to the insurance companies and they will probably settle the case and award Haydn James some hundreds of thousands of dollars just because it is cheaper than fighting a case.

So Haydn James will probably win his case and walk away a richer man, having successfully pulled off what I can only see as a premeditated fraud.

Haydn will not face a Judge – he’ll just face an accountant weighing up risks and balancing books rather than weighing up rights and wrongs.  It is a sickness of our times that Haydn will win – that a pirate’s claim against his quarry is entertained rather than someone having the balls to keelhaul him.

There is however one saving grace.   Haydn will be judged.  Yes on the Day of Judgment,  God may well judge him.  Haydn should hope that he does.

For He will be a far kinder and more compassionate Judge than the one that will judge Haydn.

The Judge who is destined to judge Haydn James is a mean-spirited, depraved, hanging judge who will show him no mercy, but smite him down and condemn him to a life of shame and moral depravity that his money will not be able to buy him a way out of.

On the gradient scale of Nasty Judges, this one is as nasty as Haydn James is dishonorable.

That Judge is Haydn James, and he will destroy what’s left of him.